Re: [Tagging] Feature: covered=yes - Added to Map Features Properties

2009-11-04 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Pieren wrote: Then call for comments on the main ML and not only for the three guys subscribed to this relative new list to get a maximum of comments. Roughly 100... and I've not checked the gender balance. But I would add to the above: if it's an important proposal, then by all means

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] Path vs footway vs cycleway vs...

2009-11-28 Thread Richard Fairhurst
I'm doing a lot of mapping of pedestrian and bike paths around my area, and am having trouble deciding when to use path, when footway, and when cycleway. I'm particularly troubled by the way Potlatch describes path as unofficial path - making it sound like an unpaved line of footprints carved

Re: [Tagging] football or soccer ?

2010-06-28 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Liz wrote: Where I live there are FOUR games played all called football. Only one really uses the feet on the ball http://www.saasta.fi/saasta/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/handegg.jpg cheers Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Waterway direction

2010-08-31 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Nathan Edgars II wrote: Adding a oneway tag explicitly says that it flows that way. Please please don't do that. Navigable waterways do sometimes have oneway sections for boats. For example, it's common on river bridges for one arch to be devoted to upstream traffic, another to downstream.

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Craft

2010-09-08 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Peter Körner wrote: after two weeks without contradictions, I'll open up voting for the Craft proposal: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Craft Please, this stuff belongs on tagg...@. If there is a tagging suggestion that you really really feel that talk@ HAS to know

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - Craft

2010-09-08 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Richard Fairhurst wrote: Please, this stuff belongs on tagg...@. (and of course I should have made clear that the message was primarily intended for talk@, sent to tagging@ for information really and to reassure all the lovely people who do already post here :) ) cheers Richard -- View

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-talk] A warning about gates and other barriers

2010-09-19 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Nic Roets wrote: AFAIK, highway=gate has been deprecated for 2 years. Some bot changed them all to barrier=gate during 2008. Around the same time someone redirected the Tag:highway=gate to Tag:barrier=gate. Yes, sorry, I meant barrier=gate. Richard

Re: [Tagging] Successful proposal

2010-10-13 Thread Richard Fairhurst
NopMap wrote: Considering the reversal of the crafts entry, I consider the changes of Jonobennett very questionable as with his next edit on MapFeatures he completely removed several established main tags, e.g. barrier which is used over 10 times in Germany alone. I believe that was

Re: [Tagging] Successful proposal

2010-10-13 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Craig Wallace wrote: Yes, I agree with that, byway is really England and Wales specific. And I think its generally deprecated there anyway Yes, it is, especially since the Countryside Rights Of Way Act (CROW) which significantly reclassified UK 'byways'. It is better to use a universally

Re: [Tagging] [OSM-dev] Super-relations or not

2010-11-01 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Peter Budny wrote: If you want this to be the standard way of tagging things, then we NEED to get the tools up to spec. I also noticed that Potlatch doesn't change the role from forward to backward when you reverse a way. (JOSM does the right thing, though.) Patches welcome. I'm not

Re: [Tagging] Call for German, French, Russian Japanese updates for changed tag

2010-11-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Tom Chance wrote: When that happens, the only logical course of action is to update the wiki documentation showing the new tags and removing the deprecated tags. It makes no sense to continue telling people about deprecated tags. Even accepting that there is such a thing as a deprecated

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Rendering locks in Mapnik/Osmarender

2010-12-20 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Wyo wrote: Hmm, no remarks at all. Now what shall i do next to get this into renderers? Write and submit good-quality patches for Mapnik itself, osm2pgsql and the standard stylesheet. I believe Mapnik itself isn't yet capable of rotated icons (see slide 8 at

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - default layer value for bridge and tunnel

2011-01-17 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Canabis wrote: I didn't recieved notification of block of messages. I relied on the phrase in the auto answer: Either the message will get posted to the list, or you will receive notification of the moderator's decision. Unfortunately the amount of spam postings and cross-postings from

Re: [Tagging] Pls explain?

2011-02-11 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Lennard wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_%28structure%29 The River Soar near Zouch, Leicestershire (UK) has a set of emergency mooring dolphins for use in times of flood. Makes me laugh every time I boat past there. cheers Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Key:designation)

2011-03-01 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: There is already 2 alternative ways to tag these (path and foot/cycle/bridleway), I feel we don't need a third one. Do try and keep up. This is not a third way of tagging. This is _additional_ information that can be used with either existing scheme. There is no

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Key:designation)

2011-03-01 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Markus Lindholm wrote: If this tag designation is about formal status in the UK It isn't. It's about formal status, full stop. You could just as easily use it to record that a European waterway is UNECE Class Vb. Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Key:designation)

2011-03-02 Thread Richard Fairhurst
M?rtin Koppenhoefer wrote: it might also help to use namespaces for the values, like uk:public_bridleway instead of public_bridleway So I presume you're planning to do that for other tags whose meaning varies by country, like highway=uk:trunk, highway=de:motorway... OSM. For People Who Don't

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - Voting - (Key:designation)

2011-03-02 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Tordanik wrote: I'm still not quite sure whether I understand what designation=* is supposed to do. It's to record the legal status, or designation, of a given object - whether that object be a footpath, a waterway, or whatever. Having now looked at the wiki voting page I'm afraid the

Re: [Tagging] drive_through (thru!)

2011-03-04 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Dave F. wrote: I thought the agreed tagging is to use the correct English spelling. Am I mistaken. No, you're correct. The lingua franca of OSM is British English. cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.638310.n2.nabble.com/drive-through-thru-tp6088632p6088664.html

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sidewalks as separate ways

2011-03-25 Thread Richard Fairhurst
David Paleino wrote: Come on, it's like any other relation. If potlatch can't support *ANY* kind of relation editing, it's not my fault. It's a bug. I don't use Potlatch, so I can't tell how advanced his support for relations is. Not good enough. It is incumbent on you, as someone proposing

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sidewalks as separate ways

2011-03-25 Thread Richard Fairhurst
David Paleino wrote: Why, oh why, this seems so out-of-context to me? I think I already gave a solution: if you want to do it simple, use sidewalk=*. If you want to add more details, follow my proposal. I'm not remotely interested in the merits or otherwise of your proposal. I don't have the

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - Sidewalks as separate ways

2011-03-25 Thread Richard Fairhurst
David Paleino wrote: No, it's up to YOU, as a developer, to support basic OSM things. Relations are an OSM primitive, and to be considered the official editor, since you're being hosted on osm.org, you MUST implement them. That's IMHO, obviously. It's IYHO but your O would be better if it

Re: [Tagging] Lanes tag, way forward

2011-09-28 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Pieren wrote: Am I the only one who think that the turnlanes plugin is splendid but unworkable for average contributors, reserved to one editor (JOSM) and resulting data (relations) obscure/opaque/cryptic for humans ? No, you're certainly not the only person who thinks that! cheers

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

2011-09-28 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Toby Murray wrote: The argument that more hard-core riders can't judge the bicycle friendliness of a road is ridiculous. Any bicycle friendliness tags will obviously be targeted at average commuting cyclists. It might seem obvious to you, but something else seems obvious to me! And that's

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - bike safety

2011-09-28 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Pieren wrote: Then we can delete the keys smoothness , sac_scale, mtb:scale and tracktype. But, oh no, they seem to be widely used. YMMV. I've never seen the first three in the wild in the UK. tracktype was once popular but is largely being supplanted by objective use of the surface= tag. We

Re: [Tagging] looking for native speaker opinion: tidal / tidalflat / tidal flat

2011-11-23 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Martin Koppenhoefer wrote: Beeing the two proponents of tidalflat_path and tidal_road not native English speakers we decided to ask here in the international list which term is best suited Yes, A. By and large (and, of course, there are exceptions), English does not run two words together

Re: [Tagging] RFC: highway=tidal_road

2011-11-24 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Dave F. wrote: That's not what he said, you know it. Typical Paul I ignore facts just so I can start an argument Johnson. Traditionally I try to act as an administrator rather than a moderator on this list, but I think that oversteps the mark a little, I'm afraid. By all means disagree on the

Re: [Tagging] Mapping guidelines

2012-01-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Nathan Edgars II wrote: So much for your ground truth, eh? [...] Obviously you know nothing about this specific case, and should not be making bogus suggestions about tagging. Could we calm this down a bit, please? Thank you. Richard tagging@ admin -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Named railway locations

2012-02-20 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Richard Mann wrote: Maybe railway=location? Or even railway=locality, to tie in with the well-established place=locality for tagging a 'lieu-dit'. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lieu-dit: The name usually refers to some characteristic of the place, its former use, a past event, etc.) cheers

Re: [Tagging] Named railway locations

2012-02-20 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Richard Mann wrote: Yes, I remember Adlestrop ... ...the name because one afternoon Of inappropriate railway=station tagging the express train[1] drew up there Unwontedly. It was late June. cheers Richard [1] or at least, as near as we get to one on the Cotswold Line. -- View this message

Re: [Tagging] dispute about center island in a turning circle

2012-03-13 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Martin Vonwald wrote: The central island - if there is one at all - of a mini-roundabout, must be traversable, while this is not true for the roundabout. Indeed. So NE2's original example isn't a mini-roundabout - it's a roundabout. Therefore tag it as a roundabout. Either

Re: [Tagging] sidewalks and tagging for the renderer

2012-04-12 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Philip Barnes wrote: After more careful thought, the only UK instance of a path following a motorway, that I am aware of, is the old Severn bridge, and they are on different decks. There's a similar one on the nearby M5 bridge over the Avon, too. cheers Richard -- View this message in

Re: [Tagging] Another reset on roundabouts

2012-05-18 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Andrew Errington wrote: It's easy to edit the wiki. It's easy for Potlatch and JOSM developers to edit the software to do the Right Thing. How do we make this happen? I like your it's easy statement, and look forward to you publishing details of where one can get the 40-hour day which will

Re: [Tagging] Another reset on roundabouts

2012-05-18 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Andrew Errington wrote: [P2 patches] Assuming it is a desirable thing, how do we make it happen? You'll have to excuse this for being a glib answer but - essentially, someone needs to write the code. The ideal situation is if you, or someone else who wants to see the feature, are sufficiently

Re: [Tagging] Turning circle with island or turning loop (was Re: (Mini)Roundabout: examples

2012-05-18 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Josh Doe wrote: I better not get on my soapbox about how we need the OSM.org stylesheet to be located on GitHub, and to use Carto so people can use TileMill for designing. I don't think anyone disagrees with you. It's just that soapboxes don't in themselves produce code. Why not start a

Re: [Tagging] Extended Conditions - response to votes

2012-07-05 Thread Richard Fairhurst
aighes wrote: This shouldn't be a problem, because you can have a GUI for mapping such data. E.g. roadsigns-PlugIn for josm. Indeed, but with the paucity of editor developers, it's not enough just to say oh, the editor developers will code support. They have more than enough to do and not

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Blue flags (Foundation for Environmental Education's Blue flag criteria for beaches and marinas)

2012-07-06 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Janko Mihelić wrote: Simone is right, it's Foundation for Environmental Education. Maybe the tag should be changed if it's confusing. I added fee so there are no possible conflicts. Tagging should be mapper-friendly. You can't expect people to remember what the (obscure) organisation is that

Re: [Tagging] Tagging Blue flags (Foundation for Environmental Education's Blue flag criteria for beaches and marinas)

2012-07-06 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Janko Mihelić wrote: After some time, I came to the same conclusion. Can we change the wiki page, or do we have to make a new page? It's a wiki. :) Go ahead and change it. cheers Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] drinkable vs. drinking_water

2012-07-12 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Janko Mihelić wrote: I don't know if this is for consideration, but the word potable is not very known outside english speaking countries Or even inside them! I've never heard anyone use it in everyday speech. If I did I'd think they were referring to a snooker ball... cheers Richard --

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

2012-07-31 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Paweł Paprota wrote: The recommendation of using relations in this case is just to kick off the whole thing and define some base line for collaboration - not because I desperately am itching for fixing some technical design problem in OSM. In theory there is certainly a logic to using

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

2012-07-31 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote: This is actually not an argument against any tagging proposal, but argument for improving relation handling in editors. I don't think anyone's arguing with that. But are you offering to do the coding? Because someone has to. cheers Richard -- View this

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

2012-08-01 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote: On the other side of the spectrum is Potlach, which makes anything involving relations overly complicated. I've fixed my share of relation bugs, that I dare to say came from these poor editing capabilities. Wow. When was the last time you used Potlatch? 1873?

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

2012-08-01 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Petr Morávek [Xificurk] wrote: I apologize if my words sounded harsh or offending. I admit that I'm not regular user of Potlach, so my knowledge of it is kind of limited. I can tell... you can't even spell it. ;) (Sorry, cheap shot. But it's PotlaTch.) 1) Pointless members of relations, e.g.

Re: [Tagging] Data redundancy with ref tag on ways vs relations

2012-08-01 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Paul Johnson wrote: So fix the other editors. Potlatch is notoriously painful when it comes to relations, and it really shouldn't be. Sigh. Are you going to quantify that and offer some suggestions (or, hey, some code), or just throw around unsubstantiated assertions? Richard -- View

Re: [Tagging] RFC: Names localization

2012-08-01 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Andrew Errington wrote: It's also not true that in a 'monolingual' country that there is only one name for something. For example, London is 'London' to a British person *ahem* It's Llundain in one of Britain's two official languages. cheers Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Proposal for a study about tagging suitability

2012-08-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Pieren wrote: When it is exceeding a ratio 'x', it is indicating that the tag failed on its job either because one of the OSM editor is using it incorrectly (P2 presets for designation) or simply because it is not enough self-explanatory (location). Any thought, comments ? Yeah, my thought

Re: [Tagging] Historic road numbering?

2012-09-23 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Philip Barnes wrote: Is there a means of tagging the old road numbers for a road that has been declassified? http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/old_ref cheers Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Historic-road-numbering-tp5727047p5727053.html Sent

Re: [Tagging] Tagging GB railway stations and track

2012-11-09 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Peter Hicks wrote: I'm part of a group of people who are working to get a richer set of metadata attached to the railway network in Great Britain, specifically: [...] This is a terrific idea. I've long thought that OSM would be a natural home for a sort of Open Quail and am delighted to see

Re: [Tagging] Clean-up the seamark landmark tags on the wiki (and perhaps later in the db)

2012-11-23 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Frederik Ramm wrote: I have a suspicion that this duplication of tags is largely the result of OpenSeaMap trying to opt out of the rest of the community - if we use our own namespace then we don't have to discuss with those landlubbers. We have not bothered much about that as long as

Re: [Tagging] How to solve the problem with relation overload?

2012-11-30 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Philip Barnes wrote: Does anyone else find that editing ways with relations slows potlatch to a crawl? I find that there is a long delay when ever I do anything to them? It shouidn't do (and hasn't done on any system I've seen), but I did see a trac ticket that reported something similar. If

Re: [Tagging] Source tag - deprecated for use on objects?

2013-01-07 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Dudley Ibbett wrote: If putting source on the changeset is to be the way forward I don't think that's at all a given. Serge and some other people are proponents of it. Other people think it simply doesn't work for real-world mapping. There is no consensus, but the numbers show that the most

Re: [Tagging] Source tag - deprecated for use on objects?

2013-01-07 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Eckhart Wörner wrote: Except that source-tag-on-object does not work either for real-world mapping. Source tags are rarely updated when the source changes. FWIW, back when changesets didn't exist and we had created_by on objects, I took the view that the created_by tag was the property of an

Re: [Tagging] Proposed relation give_way

2013-03-14 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Simone Saviolo wrote: I noticed that the proposal for a give_way type relationship [1] has been in draft for nine solid years. That's fiendishly clever given that OpenStreetMap didn't exist nine years ago... cheers Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] railway=abandoned + highway=cycleway (was: [OSM-talk-be] Abandoned Railways / cycleways)

2013-04-18 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Steve Bennett wrote: Disadvantages - tag clashes, particularly name= - is this the name of the bike path, or of the former train line? Use relations! (did I really say that?) cheers Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Bridges redux

2013-05-09 Thread Richard Fairhurst
This is generally good. One comment: Christopher Hoess wrote: [...] we might also consider whether movable should be under bridge or bridge:type. Placing it in the former would mean patching current renderers (e.g., Mapnik), but placing it in the latter makes specific movable bridge

Re: [Tagging] Bridges redux

2013-05-10 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Christopher Hoess wrote: Specifically, what made me switch was thinking about renderers, routers, and other consumers of the data. OSM's most valuable resource is mappers. We should therefore optimise tagging schemes for ease of mapping. I don't think non-programmers realise how easy it

Re: [Tagging] Childcare Tag

2013-07-19 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Serge Wroclawski wrote: As for kindergarten, while the name may have an obvious German origin, my question is what the British definition of the word is, since it's British English that we use in OSM as our base language, and does that British definition differ from the US definition. In

[Tagging] Ferry frequency

2013-10-03 Thread Richard Fairhurst
I'd like to tag approximate ferry frequency in OSM. It's important for routing: something that runs every 10 minutes is likely to be useful for routing purposes; something that runs once a day, less so. Before I go ahead and JFDI, has anyone done this / seen this done, and if so, what tags

Re: [Tagging] Ferry frequency

2013-10-04 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Thanks all - some great suggestions. To clarify, I'm not looking to put detailed timetable information in (that properly belongs in a GTFS feed or somesuch, not OSM), just a broad-brush indication to help routing engines. Based on Richard M's and Janko's suggestions, I'm tempted to use:

Re: [Tagging] Ferry frequency

2013-10-04 Thread Richard Fairhurst
sabas88 wrote: Duration is also important and currently used by OSRM Indeed. I actually edited duration out of my OSRM route profile because it gave misleading results for cycling - the router would often head for the nearest long-distance ferry, since ferries are often quicker than cycling,

Re: [Tagging] Ferry frequency

2013-10-04 Thread Richard Fairhurst
John F. Eldredge wrote: That brings up an issue for routing in general, not just cycle-routing. The routing algorithm needs to take into account the day of the week, and what time it will be when you reach a point with time- dependent restrictions, or only intermittent service (such as

Re: [Tagging] Usefulness of bicycle=dismount on ways

2013-10-07 Thread Richard Fairhurst
dieterdreist wrote: bicycle=no indicates that you cannot (legally) ride your bicycle there. If you dismount and push you become a pedestrian, so you are not riding a bicycle and bicycle=no has no effect on you. That may not be the case in the UK. The law allows walkers and their usual

Re: [Tagging] Unsuitable?

2014-01-08 Thread Richard Fairhurst
dieterdreist wrote: this might depend on the circumstances/jurisdiction. Maybe it would already put you legally in a bad situation if you drove your hgv into that road with the sign suggesting you don't do so, and something (i.e. damage) happens? Yes. AIUI Unsuitable for HGVs is not a

[Tagging] highway=track access

2014-05-19 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Hi all, There are almost 8m highway=track objects in the database (thanks taginfo!), third only to =residential and =service (thanks TIGER!). I'm interested to know what level of access people believe this implies in their home countries. Here in the UK, for example, highway=track is often

Re: [Tagging] problem with bicycle=designated

2014-08-18 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Mateusz Konieczny wrote: bicycle=designated is widely used but it not well defined. I didn't understand bicycle=designated until I visited Germany for the first time earlier this year. Now I realise why it's used... though I still strongly disagree with it. bicycle=designated exists so that

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-09-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Tomasz Kaźmierczak wrote: I would like to suggest making the paved key for highways (and probably other types of elements) official. First of all, this is OSM: there are no official or unofficial tags. Use what you like as long as it accords with core OSM tagging principles such as

Re: [Tagging] New key proposal - paved=yes/no

2014-09-23 Thread Richard Fairhurst
David Bannon wrote: The truth is the paved/unpaved state of a road is being widely ignored or incorrectly interpreted. The map at osm.org illustrates my point, perhaps as well as an XKCD cartoon :-) Yep, absolutely. But the way to fix that is to get the map at osm.org to render surfaces,

Re: [Tagging] path vs footway

2014-11-04 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Mike Thompson wrote: I am editing trails in a US National Park of which I have first hand knowledge. Nearly all trails in this area have been tagged highway=footway although most of them are open equally to foot traffic and horse traffic. This is pretty much the canonical definition of

Re: [Tagging] Feature Proposal - RFC - (Obligatory vs. optional cycletracks)

2014-12-22 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Martin Vonwald (Imagic) wrote: Mateusz Konieczny wrote: No, no, no. In my opinion, there are a few nos missing here. So I'll add at least one more: no. Well, make that two: No. ...there's no limit... Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] correct access tagging for tourist attraction

2015-01-03 Thread Richard Fairhurst
John F. Eldredge wrote: That is how I had interpreted access=destination also. Just because it has a specific legal meaning in the UK doesn't mean the tag can't be used elsewhere in the world. Absolutely - this is true of pretty much every highway= value and they, too, have been adapted for

Re: [Tagging] Wiki Edit War on using/avoiding semicolon lists

2015-01-21 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Andy Mabbett wrote: Are any of the list's moderators reading? Please see https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2015-January/021249.html Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Wiki Edit War on using/avoiding semicolon lists

2015-01-21 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Please a) stop insulting people and using hyperbolic language b) quote, and snip, properly rather than top-posting and repeating the entire previous message As you can see from https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging I have administrative powers on this list, and if this thread

Re: [Tagging] Wiki Edit War on using/avoiding semicolon lists

2015-01-21 Thread Richard Fairhurst
jgpacker wrote: [8 lines of text plus 240 lines of quote] Repeated request: Please snip the message to which you are replying to reduce it to the minimum required. Anyone continuing to post disproportionately formatted messages like this will be removed from the list. Thank you. Richard

Re: [Tagging] Tagging established, unofficial and wild campings

2015-03-21 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Jan van Bekkum wrote: [short message] [long quote] Jan (and others): please trim the message to which you are replying. Not everyone uses a mail client like gmail which automatically hides excess quoting. Thank you. Richard -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] Blatant tagging for the renderer: bridges abandoned railways

2015-03-11 Thread Richard Fairhurst
moltonel 3x Combo wrote: I'm playing the devil's advocate a bit here I believe the modern day term for that is trolling, and it wastes everyone's time. The whole railway episode has been really disheartening for the casual disrespect it shows to committed contributors. No-one has a monopoly on

Re: [Tagging] Long Tail ( was Removal of amenity from OSM tagging)

2015-05-19 Thread Richard Fairhurst
johnw wrote: As far as I can tell, the differences between novices like me and more power users is a) using JSOM or similar, and b) using relations. that is an insanely high bar to jump over. I'll let you into another secret. Of the 5% of mappers doing 95% of the work... most are not

Re: [Tagging] Removal of amenity from OSM tagging

2015-05-18 Thread Richard Fairhurst
AYTOUN RALPH wrote: OSM is only now starting to realise that not all the specialist detail can be depicted on one map and we are starting to see specialist areas creating their own detailed layer of OSM such as the Cycle Map Where only now starting to realise and starting to see means

[Tagging] Admin - pmailkeey (Mike Paley) posts

2015-06-07 Thread Richard Fairhurst
I am concerned that pmailkeey (Mike Paley)'s recent postings to the tagging@ mailing list, inter alia, have been unnecessarily combative, unconstructive, and are at risk of drowning out other contributors. I have removed Mike's ability to post to the list for the time being. As a general point,

[Tagging] Cycle route relations, networks and refs

2015-08-16 Thread Richard Fairhurst
I've encountered two fairly widespread issues with bike route tagging and would appreciate help sorting them out. In parts of Germany and elsewhere, networks of local/regional cycle routes are grouped into regions. The Nordrhein-Westfalen network is a good example. The master relation

Re: [Tagging] Describe explicitly that values of highway tag do not imply anything about road quality (except highway=motorway and highway=motorway_link)

2015-08-12 Thread Richard Fairhurst
johnw wrote: Perhaps mentioning after this addition that a mapper should refer to their local tagging documentation in the wiki It already says that: The highway type helps indicate the importance of the highway within the road network as a whole... See Highway:International equivalence for

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

2015-10-29 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Michael Reichert wrote: > That's why I suggest to use the country prefixes followed by a number > or the name depending if the country numbers its traffic signs (like > Germany) or not (like Austria). There's no need to do that. OSM is a spatial database: you can find out whether a sign is to

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

2015-10-29 Thread Richard Fairhurst
On 29/10/2015 20:40, Colin Smale wrote: How can that spatial lookup be made very cheaply? How long will it take to do a point-in-polygon for every road sign in Europe? It's very cheap. I do polyline-in-polygon for every single road and path I render on cycle.travel, because I have different

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

2015-10-29 Thread Richard Fairhurst
On 29/10/2015 21:52, Colin Smale wrote: I don't have any examples to counter your statement. But I am assuming you are referring to the use of a spatial database. It is IMHO a high barrier to entry. Are we to expect users to have that kind of infrastructure and skills at their disposal? What

Re: [Tagging] "What can I ask ..." list for browsing people

2015-11-12 Thread Richard Fairhurst
André Pirard wrote: > Thanks for your guessing what Simon means. Thanks for watching > on us, constable. Please moderate your language. Thank you. Richard tagging@ list admin -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

2015-10-30 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Colin Smale wrote: > Can you give some examples of the "tagfiddling" you refer to, > that annoys you? How do we fix that? highway=path and the associated access tags are the canonical example. highway=path was created to address perceived problems with highway=cycleway/footway, but in fact has

Re: [Tagging] More human readable values for traffic signs

2015-10-30 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Colin Smale wrote: > Is the situation now clear? Is it now (unambiguously) clear to > (all) mappers how to tag paths? No. > So you are saying that any discussions on the mailing lists are > just distractions as the real decisions are taken elsewhere. > Where would that be then? They're not

Re: [Tagging] Proposal: Sunset ref=* on ways in favor of relations

2015-11-07 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Paul Johnson wrote: > You're blaming the community for a software issue here, and that's a > little unfair to the community. If iD or potlatch or whatever are that > broken, then fucking fix iD and Potlatch. Firstly, you are not helping your cause by being so gratuitously offensive, though I

Re: [Tagging] new access value

2015-10-09 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > Contribute something useful, or get a life. Please retract that insult, and agree not to post such comments in the future, or you will be removed from this list. Thank you. Richard tagging@ list admin -- View this message in context:

Re: [Tagging] new access value

2015-10-10 Thread Richard Fairhurst
I have suspended Friedrich Volkmann from this list for one month for incivility. Please be tolerant and considerate in your postings, and avoid insults. If you do not understand a particular idiom, please don't use it. Richard tagging@ list admin

Re: [Tagging] new access value

2015-10-10 Thread Richard Fairhurst
dieterdreist wrote: > Is it because he didn't "retract" the "get a life"? Yes. The mailing lists are generally better than the nadir of a couple of years ago and it's incumbent on us all to make sure they don't descend to that state again. It is absolutely not ok to respond to someone who is

Re: [Tagging] new access value

2015-10-09 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Friedrich Volkmann wrote: > I don't care how many countries are affected. It's a distinctive meaning, > so it deserves a distinctive tag. I get really angry whenever people > write "I oppose that tag because I don't need it in my country." Indeed. However, localised meaning does not always

Re: [Tagging] Cycle cafes

2015-09-15 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Mateusz Konieczny wrote (and others said similarly): > I would use "theme". That's great. 'theme=bicycle' it is then. Nice (and rare) to get consensus so quickly! Thanks all. Richard -- View this message in context: http://gis.19327.n5.nabble.com/Cycle-cafes-tp5854712p5854737.html Sent

Re: [Tagging] New proposal: Obligatory tagging of oneway on motorway_link

2015-09-11 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Mateusz Konieczny wrote: > Documentation on wiki is one of main sources during development of > map style. You mean of the openstreetmap-carto style, which is just one of many. Richard -- View this message in context:

[Tagging] Cycle cafes

2015-09-14 Thread Richard Fairhurst
How would you tag a "cycle café"? I don't just mean one which is popular with cyclists, but one which is expressly fitted out and themed to appeal to cyclists. Where there's an integral bike shop that's easy; amenity=cafe, shop=bicycle. But with others there's no shop, but a very definite

Re: [Tagging] highway = track vs. residential

2016-01-08 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Greg Troxel wrote: > I more or less agree, from the US point of view, except that > highway=residential has a meaning of something that is > legally a road. highway=residential in the US _largely_ has the meaning "this was imported from TIGER feature code A41 and hasn't been changed". One import

Re: [Tagging] highway = track vs. residential

2016-01-08 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Mike Thompson wrote: > Although these are gravel surfaced roads (not yet tagged that way, > but physically that is what they are), the ones in question provide > access to two or more homes and/or ranches. To me these are > not "tracks" but "residential." Before I change these back, I >

Re: [Tagging] Sidewalk Tagging for Routing

2015-11-24 Thread Richard Fairhurst
John Willis wrote: > Perhaps we can have a routing engine at will interpret > a sidewalk with residential road junctions as being > along a residential road and route for Jay Walking. > [...] > I would rather the router always error on the side of > crosswalks Jaywalking is a North American

Re: [Tagging] highway = track vs. residential

2016-01-08 Thread Richard Fairhurst
dieterdreist wrote: > what's your stance on service? Slightly difficult one, but I'd tend to concur with Florian that it's best used for roads on private property (roughly "access-only"). When I use it I always try and add an access and (if unpaved) surface tag - it's too ambiguous otherwise.

Re: [Tagging] Subject: Feature Proposal - RFC - highway=social_path

2016-06-15 Thread Richard Fairhurst
John Willis wrote: > I am really having trouble understanding the reasoning behind the > resistance when it removes uncertainty and confusion while tagging. But it doesn't. You're citing your own personal hierarchy between "trails" and "easily traversed footways", which is fine. But that

Re: [Tagging] Please don't think name_1 tags are errors.

2016-01-15 Thread Richard Fairhurst
Kieron Thwaites wrote: > Whichever iD developer thought that adding random _N suffixes was > a good idea deserves to be taken out back and shot. Please withdraw that comment. Advocating violence to people is not funny. You might want to say a _feature_ should be taken outside and shot, but

  1   2   >